Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy Using 177Lu-DOTATATE: Nursing Roles in Managing Patients With Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are a diverse family of cancers that occur within the gastrointestinal tract and pancreas. Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) via 177Lu-DOTATATE is a newer therapeutic option for certain patients with somatostatin receptor-positive GEP-NETs. OBJECTIVES: This review informs on how oncology nurses treating patients with GEP-NETs receiving PRRT using 177Lu-DOTATATE can facilitate care. METHODS: Guidance on the monitoring, management, and care of patients undergoing PRRT for GEP-NETs was developed based on published literature and the nursing experience of the authors. A case study is summarized to highlight key concepts. FINDINGS: Oncology nurses provide assessment, education, direct care, and emotional support when caring for patients with GEP-NETs receiving PRRT with 177Lu-DOTATATE. As the treatment landscape evolves, so too will these roles and responsibilities.

Visual and whole-body quantitative analyses of 68 Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT for prognosis of outcome after PRRT with 177Lu-DOTATATE.

BACKGROUND: Somatostatin receptors (SSTR) represent an ideal target for nuclear theranostics applications in neuroendocrine tumors (NET). Studies suggest that high uptake on SSTR-PET is associated with response to SSTR peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of baseline whole-body (WB) 68 Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT (SSTR-PET) quantitative parameters, and the presence of NET lesions without uptake on SSTR-PET, as outcome prognosticator in patients with NET treated with PRRT. METHODS: Patients with NET who underwent at least 4 177Lu-DOTATATE PRRT cycles between 07/2016 and 03/2021 were included in this retrospective analysis if they fulfilled the following inclusion criteria: SSTR-PET within 6 months of 1st PRRT cycle, follow-up CT and/or MRI performed > 6 months after the 4th cycle of PRRT. The SSTR-PET analysis consisted of a visual and a quantitative analysis done independently by two board-certified physicians. The visual analysis assessed the presence of NET lesions visible on the SSTR-PET co-registered CT. The quantitative analysis consisted in contouring all SSTR-avid lesions on SSTR-PET and extracting WB quantitative parameters: SUVmean (WB-SUVmean), SUVmax of the lesion with highest uptake (H-SUVmax), and tumor volume (WB-TV). WB-SSTR-PET parameters and the presence of SSTR-PET-negative lesions were correlated to radiologic response (assessed by RECIST 1.1 criteria) and progression-free survival (PFS). Fisher's exact test, Mann-Whitney's U test and Kaplan-Meier curves with Cox-regression analysis were used for the statistical analysis. RESULTS: Forty patients (F/M: 21/19; 34/40 with gastro-entero-pancreatic (GEP) NET, 6/40 with non-GEP NET) were included in the analysis. The median follow-up period after the 4th PRRT cycle was 25.7 months (range 15.2-59.1). Fourteen/40 (35%) patients showed radiologic response (RECIST PR). PFS event was observed in 17/40 (42.5%) patients. Thirteen/40 (32.5%) patients had SSTR-PET-negative lesions at baseline. Higher WB-SUVmean and H-SUVmax were associated with better response (p = 0.015 and 0.005, respectively). The presence of SSTR-PET-negative lesions and lower WB-SUVmean were associated with shorter PFS (p = 0.026 and 0.008, respectively). CONCLUSION: Visual and quantitative analyses of baseline SSTR-PET can yield valuable information to prognosticate outcomes after 177Lu-DOTATATE PRRT.

Practical Guidance on [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 Treatment, Including Radiation Safety, Adverse Event Monitoring, and Patient Counseling.

BACKGROUND: The approval of the prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted radio-ligand therapy [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 represents a shift toward precision medicine-based treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. OBJECTIVES: This review aims to provide practical advice and clinical considerations for working with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617; particularly, regarding the role of nurses in managing radiation safety, monitoring and reporting of adverse events, and counseling patients receiving this therapy. METHODS: Clinical data, protocols, and guidelines are summarized alongside real-world insights to provide practical recommendations for nurses caring for patients treated with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617. FINDINGS: Nurses coordinate safe care for patients receiving [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 by facilitating communication among physicians, managing logistic concerns, monitoring for adverse events related to treatment, providing education, and counseling patients and caregivers throughout treatment.

Incorporating radioligand therapy in clinical practice in the United States for patients with prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer (PC) is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in the United States. Advanced PC evolves to metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC). Theranostics combining prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted positron emission tomography imaging and radioligand therapy (RLT) represents a precision medicine approach to PC treatment. With the recent approval of lutetium Lu 177 (177Lu) vipivotide tetraxetan for men with mCRPC, the utilization of RLT will increase. In this review, we suggest a framework for incorporating RLT for PC into clinical practice. A search of PubMed and Google Scholar was performed using keywords related to PC, RLT, prostate-specific membrane antigen, and novel RLT centers. The authors also provided opinions based on their clinical experience. The setup and operation of an RLT center requires the diligence and cooperation of a well-trained multidisciplinary team committed to patient safety and clinical efficacy. Administrative systems should ensure that treatment scheduling, reimbursement, and patient monitoring are efficient. For optimal outcomes, the clinical care team must have an organizational plan that delineates the full range of required tasks. Establishing new RLT centers for treatment of PC is possible with appropriate multidisciplinary planning. We provide an overview of the key elements to consider when establishing a safe, efficient, and high-quality RLT center.

Safety of PSMA-Targeted Molecular Radioligand Therapy with 177Lu-PSMA-617: Results from the Prospective Multicenter Phase 2 Trial RESIST-PC (NCT03042312).

The purpose of this analysis was to report the safety evaluation of 177Lu-PSMA-617 derived from the cohort of 64 patients exposed to 177Lu-PSMA-617 in the RESIST-PC trial NCT03042312 Methods: RESIST-PC was a prospective multicenter phase 2 trial. Patients with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after ≥ 1 novel androgen-axis drug, either chemotherapy naïve or postchemotherapy, with sufficient bone marrow reserve, normal kidney function, sufficient PSMA expression by PSMA PET, and no PSMA-negative soft-tissue lesions were eligible. Patients were randomized (1:1) into 2 activity groups (6.0 or 7.4 GBq per cycle) and received up to 4 cycles every 8 wk. The primary safety endpoint was assessed by collecting and grading adverse events using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Patients were followed until disease progression, death, serious or intolerable adverse events, study termination by sponsor, patient withdrawal, lost to follow-up, or 24 mo after the first cycle. Results: The study was closed at enrollment of 71 of 200 planned patients because of sponsorship transfer. A total of 64 (90.1%) patients received at least 1 cycle of 177Lu-PSMA-617: 28 (36%) in arm 1 (6.0 GBq) and 41 (64%) in arm 2 (7.4 GBq). There were 10 (43.5%), 19 (46.5%), and 29 (45.3%) patients who completed 4 cycles of 177Lu-PSMA-617 in the 6.0-GBq arm, 7.4-GBq arm, and overall, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of any grade in the 6.0-GBq arm, the 7.4-GBq arm and overall, were dry mouth (47.8%; 63.4%; 57.8%, respectively), fatigue (56.5%; 51.2%; 53.1%, respectively), nausea (52.2%; 43.9%; 46.9%, respectively), and diarrhea (13.0%; 31.7%; 25.0%, respectively). Frequencies of all other TEAEs were comparable among the 2 groups (within 10% difference). Serious possibly drug-related TEAEs were reported for 5 (7.8%) patients overall (none were considered as probably or definitely related to treatment): 1 subdural hematoma grade 4, 1 anemia grade 3, 1 thrombocytopenia grade 4, 1 gastrointestinal hemorrhage grade 3, and 1 acute kidney injury grade 3. There were no clinically significant changes in vital signs in electrocardiograms in the 2 treatment groups. No trend to creatinine increase or increasing frequency of shifts from normal to abnormal over time for any hematologic parameter was noted. Conclusion:177Lu-PSMA-617 was safe and well-tolerated at 6.0 and 7.4 GBq per cycle given at 8-wk intervals with side effects easily managed with standard medical support. With established safety, further clinical trials applying individualized dosimetry and testing different 177Lu-PSMA-617 administration schemes (activity levels, time intervals) are needed to optimize tumor dose delivery and treatment efficacy.

Prospective phase 2 trial of PSMA-targeted molecular RadiothErapy with 177Lu-PSMA-617 for metastatic castration-reSISTant Prostate Cancer (RESIST-PC): efficacy results of the UCLA cohort.

The objective of this study was to determine prospectively the efficacy profile of 2 activity regimens of 177Lu-PSMA therapy in patients with progressive metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): 6.0 vs. 7.4 GBq. Methods: RESIST-PC (NCT03042312) was a prospective multicenter phase 2 trial. Patients with progressive mCRPC after ≥ 1 novel androgen-axis drug, either chemotherapy naïve or postchemotherapy, with sufficient bone marrow reserve, normal kidney function, and sufficient PSMA expression by PSMA PET were eligible. Patients were randomized (1:1) into 2 activity groups (6.0 or 7.4 GBq) and received up to 4 cycles every 8 wk. The primary endpoint was the efficacy of 177Lu-PSMA measured by the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (RR) after 2 cycles (≥50% decline from baseline). Secondary endpoints included the PSA RR (≥50% decline) at any time (best response), and overall survival (OS). Results: The study was closed at enrollment of 71/200 planned patients because of sponsorship transfer. We report here the efficacy of the University of California Los Angeles cohort results only (n = 43). The PSA RRs after 2 cycles and at any time were 11/40 (28%, 95% CI 15-44), 6/13 (46%, 95% CI 19-75), and 5/27 (19%, 95% CI 6-38), and 16/43 (37%, 95% CI 23-53), 7/14 (50%, 95% CI 23-77), and 9/29 (31%, 95% CI 15-51) in the whole cohort, the 6.0-GBq group, and the 7.4-GBq group, respectively (P = 0.12 and P = 0.31). The median OS was 14.0 mo (95% CI 10.1-17.9), 15.8 (95% CI 11.8-19.4), and 13.5 (95% CI 10.0-17.0) in the whole cohort, the 6.0-GBq group, and the 7.4 GBq group, respectively (P = 0.87). OS was longer in patients who experienced a PSA decline ≥ 50% at any time than in those who did not: median, 20.8 versus 10.8 mo (P = 0.005). Conclusion: In this prospective phase 2 trial of 177Lu-PSMA for mCRPC, the median OS was 14 mo. Despite the heterogeneous study population and the premature study termination, the efficacy profile of 177Lu-PSMA appeared to be favorable and comparable with both activity regimens (6.0 vs. 7.4 GBq). Results justify confirmation with real-world data matched-pair analysis and further clinical trials to refine and optimize the 177Lu-PSMA therapy administration scheme to improve tumor radiation dose delivery and efficacy.

The Impact of Monosodium Glutamate on 68Ga-PSMA-11 Biodistribution in Men with Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Randomized, Controlled Imaging Study.

The prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) has been targeted for PET imaging and radioligand therapy (RLT) in patients with prostate cancer. Xerostomia is a common side effect of RLT because of the high salivary gland uptake of PSMA radioligands. Here, we aimed to determine the impact of monosodium glutamate (MSG) administration on PSMA-radioligand biodistribution within healthy organs and tumor lesions by using 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET imaging. Methods: Sixteen men with prostate cancer were randomized (1:1) into oral ingestion and oral topical application ("swishing") arms. Each subject underwent 2 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT scans within 14 d under baseline and MSG conditions. The salivary glands and whole-body tumor lesions were segmented using qPSMA software. We quantified tracer uptake via SUVmean and SUVmax and compared parameters within each patient. Results: For the oral ingestion arm, salivary gland SUVmean and SUVmax decreased on average from the control scan to the MSG scan by 45% ± 15% (P = 0.004) and 53% ± 11% (P < 0.001), respectively. Tumor lesion SUVmean and SUVmax also decreased by 38% (interquartile range, -67% to -33%) and -52% (interquartile range, -70% to -49%), respectively (P = 0.018). Swishing had no significant effect on 68Ga-PSMA-11 accumulation in normal organs or tumor lesions. Conclusion: Oral ingestion but not topical application of MSG reduced 68Ga-PSMA-11 uptake in salivary glands. Tumor uptake also declined; therefore, the clinical application of MSG is unlikely to be useful in the framework of RLT.

NANETS/SNMMI Procedure Standard for Somatostatin Receptor-Based Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy with 177Lu-DOTATATE.

With the recent approval of 177Lu-DOTATATE for use in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, access to peptide receptor radionuclide therapy is increasing. Representatives from the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging collaborated to develop a practical consensus guideline for the administration of 177Lu-DOTATATE. In this paper, we discuss patient screening, maintenance somatostatin analog therapy requirements, treatment location and room preparation, drug administration, and patient release as well as strategies for radiation safety, toxicity monitoring, management of potential complications, and follow-up. Controversies regarding the role of radiation dosimetry are discussed as well. This document is designed to provide practical guidance on how to safely treat patients with this therapy.

Increasing the screening and counseling of adolescents for risky health behaviors: a primary care intervention.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a systems intervention for primary care providers resulted in increased preventive screening and counseling of adolescent patients, compared with the usual standard of care. METHODS: The intervention was conducted in 2 outpatient pediatric clinics; 2 other pediatric clinics in the same health maintenance organization served as comparison sites. The intervention was implemented in 2 phases: first, pediatric primary care providers attended a training workshop (N = 37) to increase screening and counseling of adolescents in the areas of tobacco, alcohol, drugs, sexual behavior, and safety (seatbelt and helmet use). Second, screening and charting tools were integrated into the intervention clinics. Providers in the comparison sites (N = 39) continued to provide the usual standard of care to their adolescent patients. Adolescent reports were used to assess changes in provider behavior. After a well visit, 13- to 17-year olds (N = 2628) completed surveys reporting on whether their provider screened and counseled them for risky behavior. RESULTS: Screening and counseling rates increased significantly in each of the 6 areas in the intervention sites, compared with rates of delivery using the usual standard of care. Across the 6 areas combined, the average screening rate increased from 58% to 83%; counseling rates increased from 52% to 78%. There were no significant increases in the comparison sites during the same period. The training component seems to account for most of this increase, with the tools sustaining the effects of the training. CONCLUSIONS: The study offers strong support for an intervention to increase clinicians' delivery of preventive services to a wide age range of adolescent patients.

Provider self-efficacy and the screening of adolescents for risky health behaviors.

PURPOSE: To examine the extent to which providers' perceived self-efficacy to deliver adolescent preventive services relates to their screening practices. METHODS: Screening rates were determined by both provider self-reported screening practices and the independent report of the adolescent patient. First, 66 pediatric providers (pediatricians and nurse-practitioners), working in three pediatric clinics within a managed care organization, completed surveys assessing: (a) self-efficacy for screening adolescent patients in the areas of tobacco use, alcohol use, sexual behavior, seat belt use, and helmet use; and (b) self-reported screening of adolescents during well-visits over the past month. Second, a sample of patients, aged 14 years to 16 years, reported on whether their clinicians screened them for these behaviors during a well-visit. Adolescents completed reports (N = 323) immediately following the well visit. Data were analyzed using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Provider self-efficacy to deliver preventive services was correlated with self-reported screening in each of the five content areas, ranging from r = .24 (p < .05) for seat belt use to r = .51 (p < .001) for helmet use. Provider self-efficacy was significantly related to adolescent reports of screening in three of the five content areas; r = .25 (p < .05) for sexual behavior and tobacco use; and r = .23 (p = .06) for alcohol use. CONCLUSIONS: Providers' self-efficacy to screen adolescents for risky behaviors was significantly related to both clinician self-report and independent adolescent reports of screening during well-visits. These findings point to the importance of enhancing clinicians' sense of competence to deliver adolescent preventive services.